I saw Bruhl listed as a Best Actor candidate and was pleasantly surprised, thinking that the critics were avoiding category fraud. Then I saw him additionally listed as a Supporting Actor candidate and that feeling deflated a bit. Still, nice to know that some critics are at least trying to recognize him in the proper place.

Also nice to see a group acknowledge a documentary (“The Act of Killing”) in the Best Picture shortlist.

It’s strange that Octavia Spencer isn’t even on the longlist, given her status as an oscar contender. Maybe I don’t understand the eligibility, because why isn’t Stories We Tell listed for Documentary?

I think of all the films mentioned on the long list “Prisoners” came away with the most citations (7) . Hopefully thats an indication that it’ll make the short list. A little surprising that they opted for Davis instead of Leo. And the Paul Dano mention was a pleasant surprise.

Any critics that have the counselor on their best picture AND director short or long list cannot seriously be taken…. seriously.

And look at those nominees in SCORE – these are legitimate film critics and we hope the oscar nominations will look like this?

Lesson is – if you want to gain some publicity for yourself for being the first to announce off the bat, at least be influential enough to make sure you get all key movies for the year screened for yourself before you come up with any sort of list, short, long, extended long etc.

Indiana might have one single “legitimate” critic, assuming the Indianapolis paper has a home town one. I doubt the group includes any other full-time salaried critics. Most of the members likely write for college papers or work for TV/radio stations.

I’m sure the group has lots of nice people, but they aren’t a group that carries any weight or influences anything.